The duty of the Court to prevent harassment and the arbitrary nature of the Magistrate's actions

Headnote:
Arbitrary - Custody of Vehicle - Legal Procedure
Fact of the Case:

The Magistrate acted arbitrarily by withholding the Registration Certificate and Insurance Certificate of a vehicle that had been given to its registered owner in a case under section 279 and 304A I.P.C.
Finding of the Court:

The court found the Magistrate's actions to be arbitrary and against established legal procedure, emphasizing the duty of the Court to prevent harassment to the parties involved.
Issues: Arbitrary withholding of documents, relevance and logic of the Magistrate's order
Ratio Decidendi: The custody of the vehicle to its registered owner negated the necessity of withholding the Registration Certificate and Insurance Certificate, and the Magistrate's actions were deemed arbitrary and not in line with judicial duty.
Final Decision: The court ordered the return of the Registration Certificate and Insurance Certificate to the petitioner, expressing displeasure towards the Magistrate's actions and directing communication of the order to the concerned magistrate and the Registrar of the Rajasthan High Court.

JUDGMENT

1. - The Magistrate has acted most arbitrarily and against the established legal procedure. When the custody of the vehicle had been given to its registered owner in a case under section 279 and 304A I.P.C. there was no necessity of withholding the documents i.e. the Registration Certificate and Insurance Certificate. It is the duty of the Court to see that no harassment is caused to the parties and I cannot understand the relevance and logic of the order of the learned Magistrate who acted most arbitrarily and not as a Judicial Magistrate. In the instant case when the vehicle had been given to the custody of his registered owner what necessity would have been in retaining the registration certificate and the Insurance Certificate.

2. It is hereby ordered that the Registration Certificate and Insurance certificate shall be returned to the petitioner. The displeasure of the court may be communicated to the magistrate concerned and the copy of this order may be tagged with her personal file. A copy of the order may be sent to the Registrar Rajasthan High Court for doing the needful.

*******

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1987 Supreme(Raj) 966

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURTM.B.Sharma, J.Dharampal - AppellantVersusState - RespondentCertified Photostat Copy of order dated 10.3.1987 in S.B. Misc. Petition No. 169 of 1987.Decided On : 25-12-1987

The duty of the Court to prevent harassment and the arbitrary nature of the Magistrate's actions

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
M.B.Sharma, J.
Dharampal - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Certified Photostat Copy of order dated 10.3.1987 in S.B. Misc. Petition No. 169 of 1987.
Decided On : 25-12-1987